Mini Case study

Case summary

The current study sought to understand the current grade scores in a class of 13 students. The

study applied different procedures to establish grading for the students. The findings revealed

46% of the students scored less than grade C. The study recommends the new assistant professor

to conduct further research to understand appropriate teaching approaches that would help

improve student grades.

Analysis steps

1. the first step as a data scientist was to develop a clear understanding of the problem

statement. The approach was critical in identifying all the objective variables. For

example, understanding of the problem helped identify how all the students were graded

across the three tests assignment, midterm, and the final exams were graded using the

cutoff points of 20%, 35% and 45%.

2. I used the above scores to analyze the overall scores for each of the students. In specific, I

applied the following formula. For example, the overall assignment score was found by

considering the following formula

score∗20
Assignment Score=Student .
100

score∗35
Midterm Score=Student
100

score∗45
Final Score=Student
100
 3. The above scores helped in analyzing the total scores for each of the 13 students. In order

to get the weighted scores, I used the “SUM” function to add the scores for assignment,

midterm, and the final examination scores.

4. Moreover, the weighted scores were fundamental in coming up with the grading scores

for each of the students. in order to do this, I applied an excel “IF” function. For example,

the first function was taken to be =IF(J2>=95,"A+", IF(J2>=85,"A", IF(J2>=80,"A-",

IF(J2>=77,"B+", IF(J2>=73,"B", IF(J2>=70,"B-", IF(J2>=60,"C", IF(J2>=0,"F")))))))).

The formula helped generate individual grades for each of the students.

Results

Last Name Assignme Midter Fina Assignme Midterm/ Final Weight Grad
nt (%) m l nt /20% 35% Exam/45 ed Total e
exam exa % scores
(%) m
(%)
Carter 87 55 40 17.40 19.25 18.00 54.65 F
Morad 64 50 74 12.80 17.50 33.30 63.60 C
Rivas 60 88 88 12.00 30.80 39.60 82.40 A-
Atif 78 74 76 15.60 25.90 34.20 75.70 B
Gringas 88 61 80 17.60 21.35 36.00 74.95 B
Giompaolo 61 55 60 12.20 19.25 27.00 58.45 F
Jung 50 76 84 10.00 26.60 37.80 74.40 B
Tran 50 65 84 10.00 22.75 37.80 70.55 B-
Yu 87 55 78 17.40 19.25 35.10 71.75 B-
Lopes 63 65 72 12.60 22.75 32.40 67.75 C
Talla 78 85 92 15.60 29.75 41.40 86.75 A
Dessousa 55 78 62 11.00 27.30 27.90 66.20 C
Imbert 73 78 61 14.60 27.30 27.45 69.35 C
 
Grade Total Assigme 20  
nt
A+ 95-100 Midterm 35  
A 85-94 Final 45  
Exam
A- 80-84  
B+ 77-79  
 B 73-76  
B- 70-72  
C 60-69  
  F 0-59      

Figure 1: 46 % scored below Grade C

B-
Grade

A-

0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5

Number of students

Decision

The new assistant professor should come up with appropriate approaches for teaching the

students to help change the current scores to better scores. However, the current students

did not analyze different approaches of teaching the students. It is difficult to propose the

best approaches that would help increase student grades. However, the current study

recommends that the new assistant professor conducts further research into current and

preferences students would prefer.